tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 27 10:42:19 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Topic (was: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 9, 2007

McArdle ([email protected])



The major difference I see between {qatoy'taH wa'ben 'e' vItagh} and {wa'ben qatoy'choH} is the {-taH}.  I read my version as something like "I began to serve you continuously one year ago."  I think that this would be understood by default as implying "... and I still serve you", and that to make it mean anything else (e.g., "... and I stopped serving you six months ago") would require extra verbiage of some sort.
   
  But, as this whole discussion makes abundantly clear, interpretations vary.  I'm afraid I never understood why {wa'ben'e' qatoy'taH} didn't imply something like "A year ago I was serving you [... but not any more]".  Maybe it's just me, but turning the timestamp into the topic of the sentence seems to imply that there's a contrrast coming, even if it's only implied.
   
  qavan
   
  mIq'ey
Doq <[email protected]> wrote:
  There's nothing wrong with {qatoy'taH wa'ben 'e' vItagh}, though it basically says the same thing as {wa'ben qatoy'choH} and is less concise. It does have one problem in terms of expressing "I have served you for the past year." What you are actually saying is, "A year ago, I began serving you." That says nothing about now. Are you still serving? I guess context will have to provide that information, since it would work just as well if someone was committed to service for a month and someone asked, "When did you start your month of service?" {wa'ben qatoy'choH.}

[etc.]
 
---------------------------------
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!





Back to archive top level